Editorial: Group should drop case over anti-religious sign

Thursday, March 7, 2013

We’re pleased once again that a group promoting atheist beliefs has suffered another defeat in its federal lawsuit to place an anti-religion sign at Warren City Hall during the holiday season, but we’re certain that’s not the end of the matter.

A three-judge panel of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld an earlier ruling upholding the city’s refusal to permit the sign.

The city provides space in City Hall for Warren Rotary Club to place a nativity scene. Other more secular symbols of the season are also placed there.

The Freedom From Religion Foundation, which supports a clear separation of church and state, sued in federal district court on grounds that Mayor James Fouts illegally endorsed religion by permitting the nativity scene while rejecting the foundation’s request.

In a season which attempts to celebrate good will to all, we and many others found the sign offensive: “At this season of the Winter Solstice, let reason prevail. There are no gods, no devils, no angels, no heaven or hell. There is only our natural world. Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds.”

Fouts said no organization “has the right to disparage the beliefs” of others.

A district judge in Detroit sided with the city in June.

We acknowledge that the foundation’s statement is not an obscure description of religion. That view is held by many, perhaps an increasing number of people, but it’s inaccurate to leave it at that. Religious thoughts and beliefs are indeed capable of softening hearts and freeing minds.

The foundation has said it expects to take the next legal step, asking the full Sixth Circuit to consider the lawsuit. If the full appellate court rules against it, it wouldn’t surprise us if the case goes to the U.S. Supreme Court, The foundation is arguing that Fouts’ decision trampled on the foundation’s free-speech guarantees.

Perhaps. As we’ve pointed out previously, such cases, once they get into federal courts, aren’t a forgone conclusion. The city might well lose at the next step, but we agree with the city: A sign disparaging all religions is offensive. Unless it can persuade a court to order removal of the nativity scene — its ultimate goal, we gather — the foundation should drop the case.